‘I didn't come here with any conditions’, Miriam Dalli

New MP believes Malta’s 2050 Carbon Neutrality aim is reachable

Newly co-opted MP Miriam Dalli insists there were no conditions attached to her decision to quit her European Parliament seat to join the Maltese Parliament.

In an interview with The Malta Independent on Sunday, Dalli said that, while this was not an easy decision, she accepted Prime Minister Robert Abela’s request because she believes she can contribute to local politics.

Dalli and OPM chief of staff Clyde Caruana were co-opted to Parliament to fill the seats vacated by former Prime Minister Joseph Muscat and Labour MP Etienne Grech. A casual election to replace her at the European Parliament will be held on 5 November.

During the interview, Dalli spoke at length about the 2050 Carbon Neutrality role, a topic which she had been working on at a European level. Asked about speculation that she could be given such a portfolio in an upcoming Cabinet reshuffle, Dalli said that such decisions are the Prime Minister’s prerogative.

She was also asked about migration, saying that she agrees with the “strong” stand being taken by PM Abela.

Newly co-opted Labour MP Miriam Dalli says she decided to quit the European Parliament and join the House of Representatives because she felt she has a contribution to give locally. Speaking to The Malta Independent on Sunday, Dalli said she did not come to Malta with any particular conditions. She also spoke about her aims, Malta’s reputation abroad and the environment. Why did you decide to give up being an MEP, and accept being co-opted to the Maltese Parliament?

Prime Minister Robert Abela spoke to me a few weeks ago and asked if I would consider coming to Malta. I discussed it with my husband, and it wasn’t an easy decision as I enjoyed my work in the European Parliament. I loved it.

But I felt that I have a contribution to give here. I want to help Robert Abela and his government and try to give a positive contribution here, even as he has a vision that is in line with what I believe in.

In particular, if we speak about the 2050 Carbon Neutrality goal, it is something that I have been working on in the European Parliament and I want to ensure that what I worked for there, I can implement here.

So will your areas of focus as an MP be based on the environment and climate change, or do you have another area you would like to explore?

As an MP, you have to cover all the issues. As an MEP I was used to this. Obviously, one will have their areas of specialisation. What

I learnt over the past six years I would like to continue following up on, but then that would depend on what happens, how things evolve, etc.

You left a very good job in Brussels and came back to Malta. You are a very highprofile politician and many are speculating that you are going to be made a minister. Is there any truth to that?

I am a Member of Parliament, so I am part of Prime Minister Robert Abela’s team. If and when he decides that he wants to change things, then that is up to him. I didn’t come here with any particular conditions. I gave up my MEP seat straight away. My main aim is to try and give a positive contribution. I’ve been involved in politics for a very long time and I was never in it with any particular condition. So, it is up to Prime Minister Abela as to how he wants to move things forward and where he feels I can contribute the most.

You mentioned the plan for Malta to reach Carbon Neutrality by 2050, but that will require a lot of changes locally, including infrastructure-related changes to deal with electric vehicles for example. Realistically speaking, can Malta make that timeframe?

We’re in 2020, so we are speaking about 30 years. This change will not come about overnight, so it will have to be planned over a number of years. If we start doing things now, then we are in time to make things happen. This is not only limited to Malta, as the EU is also pushing for carbon neutrality by 2050 and is doing so with clear targets for 2030 and 2040. We also need to do that as a country. By doing so, we can plan to achieve 2030 targets, move forward to the 2040 targets and then achieve the 2050 targets. It will be a staggered approach.

I’ve seen similar things done on other laws I’ve worked on. You need to give enough time for industry to adapt. If we say we are moving for industry to pollute less, then we need to give them time, allow for transition periods, and provide enough time for workers to upskill and reskill. So it needs to be planned out, but I would say that it is doable. We are a small country and I think that we can do things faster than other countries.

It also requires a change in mentality and culture.

Looking at Malta’s performance in the environment sector over the past few years, how do you think the government has been tackling the issue? There has been a lot of criticism from the environmental lobby on, for example, road widening. How would you rate Malta’s performance so far?

We are at a particular point where people are becoming much more aware. When people become more aware, that also helps with changes in policy.

If a few years ago you would have said that we will be banning single-use plastics, people would probably have said it will never happen. If, years ago, you would have said that we would have started producing energy from a cleaner source, not from Heavy Fuel Oil but from LNG, people would have said that this will not happen.

So this kind of awareness also triggers change more quickly. We need to make sure that we deliver. We need to ensure that we reach a balance as there will always be development, but it needs to be done in the right way and balance the environmental benefits.

I am a firm believer of the environment being a trigger for creating jobs and of its economic aspects. I don’t believe that the environment and the economy are in two separate bubbles. Looking at the EU’s work on the Green Deal, it is going in this direction. We need to look at the environment as a job creator and as something that helps the economy.

When we speak about the Green Deal, we are not solely focussing on the environment, as it is also about the economy and the social aspect, with all three coming together. In today’s world everything is linked. Whilst giving importance to the economy, we must give the same importance to the environment and the social aspects.

How do you think the government has been faring in creating this balance and also in terms of its environmental credentials in general?

There is room for improvement. A lot has been happening over the past months and I have seen a positive change. If there is this commitment to move towards carbon neutrality, that means we need to deliver more.

The Prime Minister recently said that Malta is full up for irregular migrants, but not full up for migrants arriving legally to work. What is your opinion on this statement, and do you think a different approach to that which Robert Abela is taking, where he is playing hardball with the EU, is needed?

I agree with Prime Minister Abela’s approach, that he takes a strong stand when it comes to irregular migration. The EU has been speaking about solidarity for a very long time, but nothing tangible happens. We spoke about migration issues in the EU Parliament time and time again and we always hear the same narrative, that we need solidarity. But when something happens, our country and a few others, mainly Italy and Greece, turn to other countries and nothing really happens.

When looking at relocations, we’ve seen large EU countries taking just a few people and that is not really helping, it is not responsibility-sharing and that, for me, is not solidarity.

There is a difference between irregular migration and legal migration. Through legal migration a country can devise how many employees it wants, in which areas, what skills it requires and then attracts those employees.

So, in my view, the two issues are completely different and need to be tackled in different ways.

The EU Commission has put forward its proposal for the New Pact on Migration and Asylum. Does it go far enough, or will it still result in the same problems?

Until we have mandatory relocation we will remain in the same position. Voluntary relocation is what we have today and frankly it is not working, as we have some countries that don’t care and others who just take low numbers.

What the Commission is doing slightly differently this time round is saying that countries need to either help through voluntary relocation or through sponsored returns. I would assume that most countries will go for the latter and I am not convinced that this would really help the frontline member states.